Logitech CEO: Google TV has not delivered on its promises

Google's attempt to integrate Internet services into TVs via set top boxes or inside TVs themselves has not exactly been a big hit with consumers. In fact it hasn't been a huge success for companies that have launched products based on Google's television/internet hybrid technology. The Wall Street Journal reports that as part of its financial conference call with analysts this week, Logitech's acting president and CEO Guerrino De Luca admitted that its Google TV-based set-up box the Logitech Revue has not been a success.

Part of the reason was that more units of the Logitech Revue were returned to the company than were actually sold. Guerrino said that the Google TV platform was partly to blame, saying, " ... Google TV has not yet fully delivered to its own promises." Logitech launched the Revue product in the fall of 2010 for $299 and later cut the price to $249. As we reported on Thursday, Logitech has now slashed the price of the product to just $99. In explaining the price drop Guerrino said, "There was a significant gap between our price and the value perceived by the consumer."

Google TV's platform has also been built into televisions by companies such as Sony. The idea was to give TVs more Internet features including a full version of Google's Chrome web browser, access to lots of Internet video platforms such as Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go and others and also access to social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook. One of the biggest issues with Google TV is that a number of television networks have blocked Google TV's access to online versions of their TV shows. Consumers have also complained that the Google TV service itself can be too hard to use.

A Google spokesperson said that the company still supports its Google TV efforts and that a major update will be released for the platform later this fall. The spokesperson added, "It's still early days for smart TVs and we're investing to continue to bring innovation and progress for our partners and users."

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google releases new search UI for tablets

Next Story

Intel talks more about Ultrabooks


Commenting is disabled on this article.

I just bought my Logitech Revue today. So far I love it, but it does need apps. Hopefully Google delivers Honeycomb with the Android Market soon. Logitech CEO was right about the return rate, hell for $300, it's not worth it. I'm glad that Logitech did poorly on this so I can buy for $39 with my $60 Best Buy Gift Card.

Logitech was stupid enough to think it can compete with a $99 Apple TV? How come he didn't mention that?

jasonon said,
xbox could compete with this better if it had a web browser...

the browser is so slow and buggy that it's not worth much... the xbox wins hands down since it has a lot more going for it than the logitech revue for example. I had my dad return it after 3 months when google just didn't give us the marketplace update that they had promised.

Maybe it's not a surprise, but people really just want to watch TV when they buy a TV. Most people that can afford higher priced TVs, probably already have a laptop or desktop they can surf on while they're watching the TV. Also, computers with HDMI are getting more common, and people can hook up to watch online shows with a simple cable if they want to avoid paying higher subscriptions.

Also, you can get better 'smart' TV with Windows Media Center or Xbox. Google TV still has some stuff to catch up with.

Here is a good way to predict why GoogleTV would not work.

Example #1: Microsoft
Microsoft has had Windows Media Center, and even embedded versions using both NT and WinCe for nearly 10 years. It inherently supported Apps, and was a univeral TV hub. It has only been 'marginally' successful, and that is the in the home DVR users with products like HomeRun or built in tuners.

They were unable to get any cable provider to use the product or even integrate with the product properly. (Getting CableCard is still a nightmare for most people.)

They also were unable to get any contracts to use the product or license usage of TV content from any major companies in the 'normal' media industry.

It wasn't until they did Zune and then got Netflix did XBox and Media Center start to have any media company partnerships. CinemaNow and few others did have some levels of integration, and this is with WMC having a full API and Apps system, so that Hulu could directly plug into and use the UI for users, instead they created their own, why?

Example #2: Apple
Apple TV was going to offer far more than what Apple was able to provide, as they hoped its iTunes popularity would win over broadcast companies and they would be begging for the change to be offered for AppleTV.

This did not happen even for Apple.

So, from these examples we have learned that...

The media industry has been avoiding 'computer' access to their content on every level, with the TV industry being the hardest to crack, with even powerhouses like Hulu still having to beg for access.

There is no 'standard' of online access that partners with and includes the local television stations and cable companies, so they can sell localized advertising on the content (which is what is hurting Hulu as well).

So knowing all of this...

With the two biggest technology media provider companies in the world, Microsoft and Apple not being able to provide easily and consistent on-deman/live content, why on earth would ANYONE have considered that Google was just going to make it happen, and do so 'easily'?

This isn't about the technology, as Windows and Media Center has had the technology, the Apps, and even things that Android and OS X cannot like the content protection features, inherent CableCard support, newer HD resolutions, and real 10-16bit per channel color.

So if it isn't about 'Apps' or 'Integration' or 'Features for the Users', then it is about the limitations of what the broadcast industry will let happen. PERIOD.

This is why this shouldn't have been a surprise that Google would get content blocked, and ya people can blame the providers for getting the content blocked, but the SAME is true for Microsoft and Apple.

Google was either conning people or themselves if they thought they could do what Microsoft and Apple could not, with Microsoft trying to do this for over 10 years.

Google did buy up SageTV, so they may be re-thinking their STB strategy.. But either way, Google TV is a huge failure.. Google may have to go first party hardware for any future plans.. i doubt the current google tv players are going to try at it again.

It failed because it didn't had any appeal for the average consumers. Too complex for the average user.

Sounds to me is it's a failure as usual on the TV and Movie Industries side since they're blocking access to their services via the TV. Instead of thinking ahead and allowing their content to be distributed in ways the consumer wants they block any possible solution we want.

Neo003 said,
That's what you get for thinking "Ohh it gonna be fine since it's Google".

well it was going to be good it was in high demand..